On 2011-10-07 at 11:01:50, Thomson, Martin wrote:
> On 2011-10-07 at 10:52:45, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> > No, the "X-" was intentionally put there to match similar
> > extensibility in for instance HTTP-headers.
>
> Why waste the bytes? Anything other than "http" or "https" can be
> recognized as an "extension" without some arbitrary 2 octet prefix.
>
> Or were you looking for a rerun of the "X-" spat?
I was just informed that you might not have read this:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-saintandre-xdash
It might explain my reaction, for which I apologize.